[MD] Philosophy and Abstraction

[Matt Kundert]

DMB said:
Again, I don't see how they are even related, let alone parallel to 
each other. You say that you don't see any difference that makes a 
difference and I'm saying they are not even similar. You think they 
are close enough that one could replace the other but I think apples 
and oranges have more in common.

Matt:
Okey-dokey.  Got it.

Though I'm not sure what more there is for me to say, other than 
what I suggested in "Quine, Sellars, etc."

DMB said:
A man's vision is the most important thing about him, James says. 
These two styles answer different needs and those answers appeal 
to different types. This is a matter of degree, of course, and hardly 
anyone is just one or the other. That's what I'm talking about with 
respect to Sellars in particular and analytic philosophers in general.

See, you've attached yourself to the kind of pragmatism that comes 
out of the analytic school.

Matt:
Oh, shit, I didn't know!

Oh, wait, I did.  And, I also think that Rorty is an artsy fartsy 
reconciler.  Someone who takes the disparate tones and 
perspectives of other people doing different things and brings them 
together.

So, I guess we cleared that up: Dave thinks analytic philosophy is 
worthless; Matt does not (though he also just uses them for what 
they're good at).

I guess that's it for us.  For two people who so very basically 
disagree about so much (though I think it's all form, and not much 
content), like whether to care about form or content, I can't 
imagine there being anything worth discussing.

Matt